Would You Buy an LG EG9600 OLED UHDTV? - Page 5 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
View Poll Results: Would You Buy an LG EG9600 OLED UHDTV?
Yes 112 25.23%
No 199 44.82%
I'd have to see it for myself before deciding 133 29.95%
Voters: 444. You may not vote on this poll

Forum Jump: 
 138Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #121 of 176 Old 07-14-2015, 08:33 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,997
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2032 Post(s)
Liked: 1926
Quote:
Originally Posted by fluxo View Post
Is my VT60 equivalent to a Civic, then?
i have no idea how you twisted that, that far. the panny with the 'reliability issues' but extremely high performance would not be the civic in that scenario...
Quote:
Originally Posted by fluxo View Post
When you write "what manufacturer has made a perfect display?", it's almost as if with one short question you wish to brush away all the issues that Panasonic have had. But there is a huge difference between a little bit imperfect and some of the disastrously fault-afflicted displays Panasonic has produced. Some of them really were riddled with terrible faults ("Panasonic 11G/12G/13G black levels have seemingly doubled", "Panasonic finally issues update for 'green blob' plasma problem", "Burn baby Burn, ir and the VT30 Panasonic", "Panasonic VT50 BURN IN","50 Hz bug recorded", etc). If you only say no set is perfect and assess neither the severity nor the variety nor the frequency of the issues, then you begin the process of diminishing these issues. Little by little you start to forgive and forget. When that happens Panasonic has no incentive to make quality products because no matter how often they fail they will always be accepted as a being a premium brand.
i'm not saying to ignore the faults panasonic has had, but that you should not ignore the faults that EVERY other manufacturer has had as well. and when i look at that, it seems like i'd rather have a panasonic with great picture quality and some reliability issues than brand 'x' with worse picture quality and some reliability issues...

trust me, this is NOT a matter of forgive and forget. it's a matter of me being extremely harse, but on picture quality. the sad fact is, i'm not sure there is ONE model on the market today that i would be happy to own. and that's BEFORE i consider price, or reliability, or anything beyond picture quality.

so, in closing, it's my opinion that picture quality should be considered first, and only after that should reliability be a concern. and there's not many models that even make it past that first test. so while i'm not saying panasonic, or whoever is doing a great job, i still think it's fair to hold them in high regard as nobody else is doing any better
Quote:
Originally Posted by fluxo View Post
In terms of underlying PQ fundamentals, the Panasonics have been amongst the best. But that has been accompanied by terrible faults and reliability issues. What good is great PQ if your set dies after a few weeks? What good is a "reference" set such as the ZT if you can't watch it without destroying it?
and i see it from the other side, what's the point of having a reliable tv if it's unwatchable at the best of times?

in a way it's the plasma vs lcd thing. the ONLY good thing about lcd to me is the ease of use. but as hard as i try, i just can't watch them at home(unless it's ccfl backlit). so between the two choices, it makes so much more sense to put in a bit of work/care to get a tv i actually enjoy watching.

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One

Last edited by fierce_gt; 07-14-2015 at 08:46 PM.
fierce_gt is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #122 of 176 Old 07-14-2015, 10:06 PM
Advanced Member
 
fluxo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 843
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 445 Post(s)
Liked: 274
Would You Buy an LG EG9600 OLED UHDTV?

Quote:
Originally Posted by losservatore View Post
Why did you purchase a Plasma after all ?

Not many convincing alternatives. There were no FALD LCD sets available. Sony decided not to offer the HX950 in the UK. The OLEDs were still super expensive - at the time the 1st gen models before the price drop. The F8500 was an option. That's something I could and perhaps should have tried. I understand it's a pretty solid performer. So I didn't feel like going with Panasonic again after two failures, but it seemed like the least worst option at the time.

The VT60 can be pretty great at times. It's certainly better than the previous two. So I'm not regretting it. But it still has some issues it really ought not to have, given that it's a 16th generation model. The company isn't really that competent in my opinion. Too many mistakes.
@fierce_gt

I see from your profile you have an F8500. I understand that that TV does not suffer from some issues that blight the VT60/ZT60, or at least not to the same degree. I don't know if you have or have had a Panasonic also, but obviously those that do might view things differently to those that don't. You might ask yourself why so many ZT owners have been so eager to get rid of their sets.

Last edited by fluxo; 07-14-2015 at 10:44 PM.
fluxo is offline  
post #123 of 176 Old 07-14-2015, 10:27 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 0
The curved 55" LGs measure 55" diagonally as the crow flies

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimv1983 View Post
Many people on here are saying they wouldn't buy a TV with a curved screen and in theory I agree with that. However, if I'm watching it from a normal viewing distance and can't tell that it's curved then I really don't care. I own an EC9300 and I can't even tell it's curved while watching it. I actually have to get pretty far off angle to notice that it's curved. The EG9600 has about the same curve. You really can't tell. Samsung TVs have a much more noticeable curve.
I have been reading posts that included both dislike of the curve as well as dissatisfaction of the smallness of the LG 55s. I thought that if some people thought the LG 55s were smaller than flat 55s, maybe there's something to that and I wondered how much diagonal screen measurement was actually consumed by the curve of the screen. I held a piece of 200 lb deep sea fishing line (no stretch) from corner to corner diagonally on my 55EC9300, pulled it taut so that in the center the string stood 1 1/4" out from the surface of the screen and marked the string where it crossed between screen and bezel in the corners. It measured 55", exactly. Then I measured the screen diagonally along its surface and that measurement was nearly 56". I repeated this 2 more times with fresh lengths of string each time and the results were the same so there is no screen size loss due to the curve. This result surprised me since I was sure there would be loss and was curious to learn how much. Perhaps LG anticipated gripes about the the "practical diagonal viewing size" of a 55" curved screen vs a 55" flat screen and decided to nip those negatives in the bud by widening the screen until the corners were 55" apart, diagonally, "as the crow flies"

; =O)
bernynhel is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #124 of 176 Old 07-14-2015, 11:12 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
dnoonie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Seattle, WA area
Posts: 1,402
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Liked: 474
No I wouldn't buy one.

My current Kuro is still performing admirably but admittedly not as good as 8 years ago when it was new, a good recal would extend it's life, it doesn't have the issues the LG OLEDs have and may very well last just as long as this relatively new LG technology.

Except for the money part which would be eliminated from the below statement given the criteria of the poll, my criteria from August of last year still stands:

The criteria from my last upgrade still applies...summarized from my How Many New in 10 year post:
"Driving factors for replacement are:
  • Diminishing PQ of current display. Not yet a factor.
  • HQ good price 4K media availability. Not yet a factor, 4K blu-ray availability is a factor or a download box like Sony but made by OPPO for everyone's media.
  • Small size. Not yet a factor till there's 4K media available.
  • Availability of money. $ aren't there right now. "*
* Not part of this poll but included because this is a quote from before

Further criteria would include:
* HDCP support for new media
* HDMI cable and plug support for new HDMI spec
* I'd want to examine the build quality of the LG panel in person including plug sturdiness, panel sturdiness,
* I/O capability of the panel. DVI input? Display Port input?
* Availability of new OPPO 4K blu-ray player to go with the new panel
* UHD media with P3 and HDR.

I think that when all these criteria come together I will have a very compelling product to consider.

Of course if my current panel had rapid degradation or died this would be a vary different story.

Cheers,

OPPO UDP-205, LG OLED65C8, OPPO BDP-93, Pioneer Kuro Pro-150FD, Dynaudio 2x BM-12a Mk III Mains, 2x BM 6a Mk II surround, 2x BM 14s Subs, Allan and Heath MixWizard, room is 11'7"x 16'6"x 8" dedicated and treated. Tripp-Lite UPSs/power conditioners (because my power isn't as clean as it used to be)
dnoonie is offline  
post #125 of 176 Old 07-14-2015, 11:17 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
johnnybrulez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,683
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrubin View Post
judging by all these responses is there one display out there that AVS members can all endorse?

(exclude CRT please)
Pioneer krp ... Voltages adjusted without any artifacts ...

Even with these issues... I want an oled so bad.

I don't know what I am doing! AHHHHHHH!!!!
johnnybrulez is offline  
post #126 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 05:38 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SiGGy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Lenexa, Kansas
Posts: 1,485
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 571 Post(s)
Liked: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Wilkinson View Post
I really don't think I phrased it as though the issue is terribly prominent and in your face as you say. However, if I was reviewing the set based on what I saw at the shootout, I would have made a much bigger deal about the uniformity issue than either Consumer Reports or CNET. As I said in the shootout results thread, it's a deal-breaker for me.
Scott, thanks for taking the time to respond.

I appreciate your honest opinions about the TV and your articles; I thoroughly enjoy reading/listening to them.

The way it's phrased your article basically says "would you buy a flawed TV?" And or leads the reader to think it has a problem before even getting their thoughts on the idea.


...
Do you plan to purchase a 2015 OLED?

Yes
No, too expensive
No, I have issues with the current technology
Other

Every consumer TV that has come out has had issues; I can't tell you how many Panasonic's I returned. I refused to buy any more after my 3rd vt50 with green blobs and uniformity issues.

Ignorance is bliss sometimes is the point I'm getting at. And preloading someones brain with thoughts before asking a question that's related is only bound to cause some skewed results.

Last edited by SiGGy; 07-15-2015 at 05:41 AM.
SiGGy is online now  
post #127 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 06:11 AM
Mark Henninger
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 16,445
Mentioned: 465 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9404 Post(s)
Liked: 16687
Of course I would buy it if money were no object! Unless you added the condition that it's the only TV you can own. In that case, there's no way I'd buy it. But as long as I have room for more than one TV, and a lifetime of lottery payments coming my way, it's a no-brainer.
cardoski likes this.

Mark Henninger
Editor, AVS Forum
imagic is online now  
post #128 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 07:29 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
cardoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Beyond The Wall.
Posts: 5,114
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2699 Post(s)
Liked: 3121
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLBURNSIDE View Post
I'm not giving up my 138 inch wall sized (literally, my entire wall) display for anything!, that cost me 8 bills four years ago.

I used to have a panny plasma that had probably 5x better contrast and color than my w1070 projector, but who cares? having a movie theater in my apartment is so much cooler than any TV. I've seen OLEDs, they are awesome, but compared to a movie theater? I don't think so. The OLED would have to be 21:9 aspect ratio (I have an anamorphic lens), and be ten feet wide for me to even consider it.

Let's say that size is worth X. And image quality of OLED vs a cheap projector is worth 10X.

So, by that logic, if a 65 inch OLED costs ten times as much as my 1080p projector, but is 1/4 of the price, yet ten times the image quality, it's still 1/4 the value in the end, because of the size.

And that's being VERY generous for image quality over size. If I was being honest, I'd say size is worth 2X as much as image quality, in which case, 4X the surface area is worth 8x as much, putting a 65 inch OLED on par with a sub 1k projector capable of 140 inches, only if it was also sub 1k.

Projectors are awesome, the quality is there, the immersion is stupendous. Of course OLED doesn't compete with projectors, it competes with LCDs, and against those, it's going to win, for sure, once the price comes down. If I wasn't into projectors so much (I got my first one when I was 17, my dad - RIP - bought me one at Times Square, we played tons of Doom and Hexen on that, good times).

I sure hope there's a decent bunch of projectors coming out this year to tide me over until wall sized printable OLEDs become available in a few years.

I am right with you, I have a JVC X500 and I can not imagine any TV under 100in replacing it.

So now we are talking a bedroom TV and the OLEDs are just to expensive to not be a main panel. They do look nice but until the price comes way down there won't be one at the end of my bed any time soon. Although if price was no object i would have one in the bathroom.lol

Listening with Focal Elex headphones, Topping DSD Dac, SENCUN-audio tube preamp with tone control and Modded Little Dot hybrid tube amp with Voshkod 6ZH1P-EV tubes, Dual Discrete Op-Amp SS3602, and Alps Blue Velvet volume pot.

Watching in a room ensconced in velvet.
cardoski is offline  
post #129 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 10:58 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,771
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2515 Post(s)
Liked: 1455
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlos_E View Post
No I would not buy it.

1) I've seen it in person and I thought the banding on the edges is terrible.
2) It's curved.

Hopefully Sony will get into the OLED game.
Sony kind of is in the OLED game. Their uber expensive OLED monitor stuff is fine quality. Their cheapest OLED monitor stuff not so..
8mile13 is offline  
post #130 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 11:24 AM
Advanced Member
 
fluxo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 843
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 445 Post(s)
Liked: 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
Sony kind of is in the OLED game. Their uber expensive OLED monitor stuff is fine quality. Their cheapest OLED monitor stuff not so..
What's wrong with their cheaper PVM series?

Cheers.
fluxo is offline  
post #131 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 11:59 AM
KOF
AVS Forum Special Member
 
KOF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,188
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 284 Post(s)
Liked: 243
Voted yes. If I was buying one, I'll buy one from those offering generous exchage policy, as I know not every EG9600 are lemons. Even with its issues, I will have to make such drastic measure when the only alternatives for me are turds like the Samsung JS9500. Glad I own plasmas.

And my Panasonic plasma has been rock solid for almost two years. Sure, I had to get used to its false contouring, dithering, and phosphor lag in the beginning, but it's been relatively love affair so far.
KOF is offline  
post #132 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 12:29 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Scott Wilkinson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 3,258
Mentioned: 95 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1881 Post(s)
Liked: 4917
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mcgrupp View Post
Not to detract from the intended conversation, but maybe you can clarify something for me. I have seen people state here that HDR is what will unleash what UHD can do for the viewing experience. Is the implication that a screen size less than 78" is going to benefit less from HDR or I am totally misinterpreting things here?
In my view, HDR greatly benefits image quality at any screen size, whereas the increased pixel resolution of UHD is of benefit only at larger screen sizes and/or closer seating distances.
TMcG and cardoski like this.

Last edited by Scott Wilkinson; 07-15-2015 at 12:33 PM.
Scott Wilkinson is offline  
post #133 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 12:41 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,771
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2515 Post(s)
Liked: 1455
Quote:
Originally Posted by fluxo View Post
What's wrong with their cheaper PVM series?

Cheers.
Last few years i did read all kind of negative stuff about sony monitor stuff, limited viewing angle (color shift issues), flicker and burn-in problems were part of that. Whatever improvements they made problems from 2012/2103 will still be there to some degree especially in their cheapest offerings.
fluxo likes this.
8mile13 is offline  
post #134 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 12:57 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,771
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2515 Post(s)
Liked: 1455
Here is a 2011 sony OLED monitor review that was discussed in the OLED thread.
http://www.provideocoalition.com/the..._here-_finally
8mile13 is offline  
post #135 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 12:59 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fierce_gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,997
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2032 Post(s)
Liked: 1926
Quote:
Originally Posted by fluxo View Post
Not many convincing alternatives. There were no FALD LCD sets available. Sony decided not to offer the HX950 in the UK. The OLEDs were still super expensive - at the time the 1st gen models before the price drop. The F8500 was an option. That's something I could and perhaps should have tried. I understand it's a pretty solid performer. So I didn't feel like going with Panasonic again after two failures, but it seemed like the least worst option at the time.

The VT60 can be pretty great at times. It's certainly better than the previous two. So I'm not regretting it. But it still has some issues it really ought not to have, given that it's a 16th generation model. The company isn't really that competent in my opinion. Too many mistakes.
@fierce_gt

I see from your profile you have an F8500. I understand that that TV does not suffer from some issues that blight the VT60/ZT60, or at least not to the same degree. I don't know if you have or have had a Panasonic also, but obviously those that do might view things differently to those that don't. You might ask yourself why so many ZT owners have been so eager to get rid of their sets.
my entire argument summed up in the bold text

i haven't personally owned a panasonic, but i have friends that do, and they've all been stellar for them. the vt60/zt60 and even to an extent the st60 still make me question the f8500 purchase. the panny's hold black better, and that's something that's extremely important to me. 95% of the time, the blacks look great on the f8500, but that 5% of the time when they don't, it's really really obvious to me. the f8500 is much brighter, and more resistant to IR, but those are things i don't care much about. the brightness was actually something i found very difficult to eliminate. it's much too bright for comfortable viewing, and it wasn't until i adjusted voltages on the back panel that i found a comfortable luminance without negatively affecting 'pop' and contrast. resistance to IR is a good thing, no two ways about it, but i've never had an issue with it before. i guess it's just become second nature to the way i watch and use my displays that i'm always practicing 'good habits' to reduce the chance of IR. it really seems like playing destiny is the cause of most complaints, which to me is like being told it won't work well outside. who cares? haha.

anyway, the really unfortunate thing is that none of these displays are available anymore and nothing that is(other than 'future oled') is really even worth talking about...

Displays: Samsung PN64F8500/JVC X35
AVR: Pioneer VSX-1130K, 7.1/5.1.2 audio
Sources: HTPC, PS3, XBOX360, Wii
Control: Harmony One
fierce_gt is offline  
post #136 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 01:22 PM
Senior Member
 
jimv1983's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 423
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 355 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by cardoski View Post
None that I am aware of, but we are talking like 15ftl calibrated, so it is not a torch. It is about perfect for me. I guess a TV would be too bright but it could be calibrated down.
For me it wouldn't be about the brightness. The eye strain would be from constantly moving my eyes all over the place to be able to see the entire picture. My personal preference is to have the entire screen in the center of my field of vision. If the image extends into my peripheral vision(as it would being 15 feet from a 120" display) then I'd constantly be moving my eyes to see everything.

I have a 55" at 10 feet away and I wouldn't mind being another 1.5-2 feet away but my couch is already up against the wall.

Last edited by jimv1983; 07-15-2015 at 01:27 PM.
jimv1983 is offline  
post #137 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 03:18 PM
Member
 
Dan Arnold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernynhel View Post
I have been reading posts that included both dislike of the curve as well as dissatisfaction of the smallness of the LG 55s. I thought that if some people thought the LG 55s were smaller than flat 55s, maybe there's something to that and I wondered how much diagonal screen measurement was actually consumed by the curve of the screen. I held a piece of 200 lb deep sea fishing line (no stretch) from corner to corner diagonally on my 55EC9300, pulled it taut so that in the center the string stood 1 1/4" out from the surface of the screen and marked the string where it crossed between screen and bezel in the corners. It measured 55", exactly. Then I measured the screen diagonally along its surface and that measurement was nearly 56". I repeated this 2 more times with fresh lengths of string each time and the results were the same so there is no screen size loss due to the curve. This result surprised me since I was sure there would be loss and was curious to learn how much. Perhaps LG anticipated gripes about the the "practical diagonal viewing size" of a 55" curved screen vs a 55" flat screen and decided to nip those negatives in the bud by widening the screen until the corners were 55" apart, diagonally, "as the crow flies"
Thanks. I wondered the same thing. I'm not keen on spending more just because the screen is curved, tho' a curved screen makes sense to me for two reasons.
1. If the curve is such that at an ideal viewing distance it puts the center of the screen an equal distance from the eye as the perimeter, that makes sense in theory.
2. Does the curved screen reduce the amount of reflection that can be so annoying during dark scenes?
Dan Arnold is offline  
post #138 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 04:20 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Venice, Florida, USA
Posts: 21,464
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1418 Post(s)
Liked: 1015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Arnold View Post
Thanks. I wondered the same thing. I'm not keen on spending more just because the screen is curved, tho' a curved screen makes sense to me for two reasons.
1. If the curve is such that at an ideal viewing distance it puts the center of the screen an equal distance from the eye as the perimeter, that makes sense in theory.
2. Does the curved screen reduce the amount of reflection that can be so annoying during dark scenes?

Wouldn't the center of the screen be equidistant from one's eyes if the screen were flat?


As to glare, it would depend on the angle the light causing the glare was coming from .
mark haflich is offline  
post #139 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 04:37 PM
Member
 
drseid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Fairfax, VA
Posts: 121
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 17
I bought the 9300 and am quite happy. I would gladly do the same on the 9600 based on what I have seen in the stores if money were no object. As for the curve, I thought it would bother me a lot more than it does on both the 9300 and 9600 sets. It is pretty minor, but certainly I would prefer a flat screen like many others if given the option.

---Dave

My HT/Music System can be found here:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr...iew&1301304581
drseid is offline  
post #140 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 04:49 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Turrican4D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 751 Post(s)
Liked: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLBURNSIDE View Post
I'm not giving up my 138 inch wall sized (literally, my entire wall) display for anything!, that cost me 8 bills four years ago.

I used to have a panny plasma that had probably 5x better contrast and color than my w1070 projector, but who cares?.
More like a hundred times better.

Prof. Dr. Turrican M.D.
Turrican4D is offline  
post #141 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 04:58 PM
Member
 
Dan Arnold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
Wouldn't the center of the screen be equidistant from one's eyes if the screen were flat?
No. You can test this. Even if basic geometry is insufficient to inform, you can tell by measuring the distance from a point 90 degrees and say, 10' from the center of a flat panel. If you measure from either edge of a flat display to the same point, it will be a greater distance. Only with a screen curved to the appropriate arc for a given distance, will all parts of the display be an equal distance from the eye. Whether this makes any significant difference in viewing is another matter, as is whether the supposed benefit is worth the cost differential.

Regarding glare as in other comparisons, yes, every thing else must be equal.
Ceteris Paribus.

After writing that, I did a quick search and found:

"... [T]he concave shape reduces the number of reflections on a screen by eliminating certain angles from which they can be created. "This is very important for a display technology that produces excellent dark image content and perfect blacks, because you don’t want that spoiled by ambient light reflected off the screen," says Soneira.

He also says that curved TVs improve the viewing experience for individuals sitting off-center. Soneira explains that the curve of the screen works to eliminate some of the unintended "foreshorteneing" caused by sitting to one side. That is to say, images displayed on the far side of the screen that would otherwise look unnaturally small compared to images on the near side of the screen due to the larger viewing distance are, in fact, equalized to some extent by the curve.

Soneira also points out that the curved shape keeps the screen at a more uniform distance from the viewer's eyes when they are sitting centrally. This reduces the slight visual geometric distortion caused by the fact that the sides of the TV are further away from the viewer than the center when looking at a flat screen.
"
http://www.gizmag.com/curved-tv-benefits/34689/
Dan Arnold is offline  
post #142 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 05:15 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Venice, Florida, USA
Posts: 21,464
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1418 Post(s)
Liked: 1015
To belabor the point, please reread the post I responded to. The post talked about the distance of each eye to the CENTER of the screen, not to all points on the screen. Obviously, even the most casual of observers knows that the geometry surrounding the center makes no difference to the measurements from the center viewing position. The two eyes will be equidistant to the center of a flat, curved, of s shaped screen.


Your explanation of equidistance from all points on a curved panel would only be applicable as you noted if the seating distance is at the radius of the curve which would be very unlikely. Again, something the most casual of observers or posters would know. Thanks for your post setting me straight in case geometry was a foreign language I didn't speak.

Last edited by mark haflich; 07-15-2015 at 06:35 PM.
mark haflich is offline  
post #143 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 05:53 PM
Coyote Waits
 
htwaits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 27,239
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1333 Post(s)
Liked: 2365
Quote:
Originally Posted by daWill View Post
I would never buy a curved TV. Additionally I don't think I would buy a 4k TV under 80". I might compromise for a 75" but nothing can convince me to get a curved TV. I already have a 65" in my living room and at 12' I doubt I could tell the difference 4k vs 2k. Oled colors + contrast would be noticeable but not justifiable with the current issues.

So LG needs to flatten it, make it larger and hopefully cheaper before I bite.
The curve is added to a flat panel. They just need to stop doing that.
ONDr likes this.

My Components:
Denon X3400H, OPPO UDP-203 & BDP-93, Xfinity XG1-P, Vizio PQ, Roku 3 & Ultra 2018
Calibration Resources:
Customer's Reports -- Professional Calibrations
Calibrator's locations and tour areas.
htwaits is offline  
post #144 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 08:58 PM
Member
 
Dan Arnold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post
To belabor the point, please reread the post I responded to. The post talked about the distance of each eye to the CENTER of the screen, not to all points on the screen. Obviously, even the most casual of observers knows that the geometry surrounding the center makes no difference to the measurements from the center viewing position. The two eyes will be equidistant to the center of a flat, curved, of s shaped screen.


Your explanation of equidistance from all points on a curved panel would only be applicable as you noted if the seating distance is at the radius of the curve which would be very unlikely. Again, something the most casual of observers or posters would know. Thanks for your post setting me straight in case geometry was a foreign language I didn't speak.
Apparently that is the case, you do not "speak geometry, or trigonometry." As he wrote:
"...[T]he curved shape keeps the screen at a more uniform distance from the viewer's eyes when they are sitting centrally. This reduces the slight visual geometric distortion caused by the fact that the sides of the TV are further away from the viewer than the center when looking at a flat screen."
What is there about this you don't understand? If indeed Geometry is something you don't understand, then before you embarrass yourself further, walk up to your uncurved television, [or the wall for that matter] stand 60" directly in front of the screen and hold a tape or other measuring device so you can determine you are holding it exactly 60" away from the center of the TV or wall. Then, without moving, pivot the tape and measure to each side of the screen [or points on a wall about 60" apart] at the same height. Depending on the width of your panel you will find the distance is about 6" farther.

Essentially what you are claiming is that given an equilateral triangle with 61" sides, a line from corner A that bisects the opposite side, B-C, will be the same length as the sides, when in fact it will be about 7" shorter. You don't even need the formula for this. You can measure it yourself if common sense is also a language with which you are unfamiliar.
Dan Arnold is offline  
post #145 of 176 Old 07-15-2015, 11:55 PM
Newbie
 
Getfuzzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 0
No, because it's deficiencies would drive me crazy, no matter how much money I had to spend. I currently have a Panasonic plasma and I'm always adjusting the color as it will vary from station to station and program to program. When I buy big ticket items, I want reliability, performance and value.
Getfuzzy is offline  
post #146 of 176 Old 07-16-2015, 02:47 AM
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,901
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked: 1411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turrican4D View Post
More like a hundred times better.
And yet I enjoy my w1070 a million times more than my panny plasma. Why is that? Size. Size trumps contrast. Movie theaters traditionally had terrible contrast, but they're still considered a better, more engaging, thrilling experience than watching a flat panel TV at home.

My panny plasma was rated at 10k : 1, so contrast more like 5x, tops. If that. But even if it was 100x better, which it isn't, that only proves that, to me, as much as I love contrast, huge size + ultra low price matters. More. Much more. Besides, contrast has diminishing returns beyond a certain point. It's not like the image quality reviews of the 2015 models say that OLED is a 10 / 10 and all others are a 4 / 10. It's much closer than that. And those LCDs are of comparable size and price, some of them.

If I was still using a TV now, I would be saving up my pennies for an OLED right now, but would probably get a cheap HDR LCD until OLED prices come down.

But rather I'm saving up for a better projector, one where the 4K resolution is actually visible. Of course, once it's affordable. I fear that my own display cost / benefits calculus veers far too much in favor of the incredible immersion and movie theater experience in the home (I use my w1070 as a monitor, for TV shows, movies, games, everything. All the time).

My cheap w1070 is definitely the best piece of tech I've ever bought, and I am a complete tech nerd, I have piles of stuff I've bought and sold over the years. I don't mean for the price. I mean period. I paid 1/2 for my w1070 than I did for my 46 inch panny plasma originally, and yet enjoy it a million times more. It's hard to lay on the superlatives. But if a genie showed up and told me I'd have to give up my beloved theater sized image, for anything, I'd say go away! OLED needs to get to 75 inches for under a grand, then maybe I'll get off the projector bandwagon. But probably not, given the economics of it.

I'd estimate the costs / benefit to be about 20x more for the w1070 than a 46 inch SDR 1080p plasma. And probably still 10x more for a w1070 than a 4K OLED that costs 10x as much. At least. Even if the price was the same, I would have a hard time justifying spending money on a TV that I would simply rarely use. 99% of content is still at 1080p or lower. I'm all in favor of everyone moving to 4K, but I don't see the rush for myself. I'll let everyone else subsidize my own upgrade a year or two from now when there are lots of UHD Blurays available and lots of HDR content and the tech matures.

Last edited by RLBURNSIDE; 07-16-2015 at 03:40 AM.
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #147 of 176 Old 07-16-2015, 04:33 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Venice, Florida, USA
Posts: 21,464
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1418 Post(s)
Liked: 1015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Arnold View Post
Apparently that is the case, you do not "speak geometry, or trigonometry." As he wrote:
"...[T]he curved shape keeps the screen at a more uniform distance from the viewer's eyes when they are sitting centrally. This reduces the slight visual geometric distortion caused by the fact that the sides of the TV are further away from the viewer than the center when looking at a flat screen."
What is there about this you don't understand? If indeed Geometry is something you don't understand, then before you embarrass yourself further, walk up to your uncurved television, [or the wall for that matter] stand 60" directly in front of the screen and hold a tape or other measuring device so you can determine you are holding it exactly 60" away from the center of the TV or wall. Then, without moving, pivot the tape and measure to each side of the screen [or points on a wall about 60" apart] at the same height. Depending on the width of your panel you will find the distance is about 6" farther.

Essentially what you are claiming is that given an equilateral triangle with 61" sides, a line from corner A that bisects the opposite side, B-C, will be the same length as the sides, when in fact it will be about 7" shorter. You don't even need the formula for this. You can measure it yourself if common sense is also a language with which you are unfamiliar.

Dan. You are hammering a concept that I understood when I was about in 7th grade and I find it beyond comprehension that you feel compelled to give me a geometry lesson on a concept that almost everyone including poor idiot me understands. Why are you continuing to "embarrass" yourself by not acknowledging your imprecise writing, which we all including me are from time to time guilty of, in your original post that as far as eye distance to screen CENTER a curved panel had an advantage in theory over a flat panel. Obviously to points NOT ON THE VERTICAL LINE going through horizontal screen center it does. But to that line it doesn't. That's all I pointed out in my first response to your post. Do you want me to give you a lesson on that. Come on. Your a good guy and so am I and we don't disagree as to what you mean.


Moving on. The real issue with curved panels is the geometric distortion that a curved panel has on content intend for a flat surface. Obviously if you lay out a straight line on a screen and then you curve the screen, the line will no longer be straight. This is the biggest objection to curved screens. I will sit back to let you do the math for us all to show the error which is larger than any benefit re eye distance. The error is not huge but it is noticeable on some content unlike the eye distance benefit which is trivial.


Curved screens have a benefit in large width front projection mainly due to the need to reduce pincushion distortion when anamorphic lenses are placed in front of primary lenses. The curves also improves the focus off of center to some extent because the anamorphic lens reduces the depth of field to almost 0 compared to the great depth of field all primary projector lens have. But here the curve would have to have a radius approximately equal to the distance from the anamorphic lens to the screen and this is usually not achievable without very expensive frame bending. Screens are usually only available in two fixed radii which normally won't match the projector position.
mark haflich is offline  
post #148 of 176 Old 07-16-2015, 04:35 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Venice, Florida, USA
Posts: 21,464
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1418 Post(s)
Liked: 1015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Getfuzzy View Post
No, because it's deficiencies would drive me crazy, no matter how much money I had to spend. I currently have a Panasonic plasma and I'm always adjusting the color as it will vary from station to station and program to program. When I buy big ticket items, I want reliability, performance and value.

If you aren't married, you should never get married then.
mark haflich is offline  
post #149 of 176 Old 07-16-2015, 07:53 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
cardoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Beyond The Wall.
Posts: 5,114
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2699 Post(s)
Liked: 3121
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLBURNSIDE View Post
And yet I enjoy my w1070 a million times more than my panny plasma. Why is that? Size. Size trumps contrast. Movie theaters traditionally had terrible contrast, but they're still considered a better, more engaging, thrilling experience than watching a flat panel TV at home.

My panny plasma was rated at 10k : 1, so contrast more like 5x, tops. If that. But even if it was 100x better, which it isn't, that only proves that, to me, as much as I love contrast, huge size + ultra low price matters. More. Much more. Besides, contrast has diminishing returns beyond a certain point. It's not like the image quality reviews of the 2015 models say that OLED is a 10 / 10 and all others are a 4 / 10. It's much closer than that. And those LCDs are of comparable size and price, some of them..

Pick yourself up a JVC and you can get those blacks back.lol
RLBURNSIDE likes this.

Listening with Focal Elex headphones, Topping DSD Dac, SENCUN-audio tube preamp with tone control and Modded Little Dot hybrid tube amp with Voshkod 6ZH1P-EV tubes, Dual Discrete Op-Amp SS3602, and Alps Blue Velvet volume pot.

Watching in a room ensconced in velvet.
cardoski is offline  
post #150 of 176 Old 07-16-2015, 09:04 AM
Advanced Member
 
fluxo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 843
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 445 Post(s)
Liked: 274
The discussion of curvature can be subtle and interesting. Diagrams would be helpful here.
fluxo is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Community News & Polls

Tags
frontpage , Polls

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off